Only person with a history of running from questions, a documented history, is you. That is the truth. You have run from Pat, you have run from Raymond, you have run from every examiner who has ever confronted you, and you have run from me.

Sorry Dan, but there are two types of people, talkers and doers, people like you, are just talkers. All you got is talk.

You say I'm part of the "PCSOT indu$trial complex", when fact is, and you know this, I have done more in one year to fight the corruption in this "complex" in one year, that you ever have, and ever will.

I have paid the bill, excessively disproportionate to my perceived crimes against the polygraph establishment for telling the truth and exposing the corruption in Texas alone.

You have done nothing, taken no action, other than hide behind a keyboard, talk and run failed campaigns, where you didn't even do the hard work necessary to win.

Joe, I know you hate it when I confuse you with the facts, but please pay attention.

*Polygraph "testing" is scientifically illegitimate (save, perhaps, for the rare CIT); there is no universal "lie response"

*The finite accuracy of polygraph "testing" is unknown and in fact unknowable

*A polygraph "test" can be beaten (or fatally confounded) by following simple instructions freely available on the internet

Yet, on its web site, the APA boasts the following claim: ...APA examiners are able to attain accuracy rates exceeding 90 percent.

People need to be protected from such wildly optimistic claims. That's why I have for years been advocating for both a bill of rights for polygraph test-takers, and a countermeasure challenge series to reveal the risks, realities and limitations of polygraph "testing."

Joe, I ask you again: What is the specificity of a 4-RQ PCSOT maintenance polygraph "test"? Please cite the research that supports your claim.